https://youtu.be/Fzp7iCaWNvE is this real footage of nietzsche?

No his sister faked it to ruin his reputation.

>>8419928
thats not how his nose looks like in other pics
>>8419957
elaborate

File: a6c535750732364ebc7ce5ffd9e913a3.jpg (9KB, 251x201px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 251x201px

>>8419928
Absolutely fake. Equipment was too rudimentary in 1899 to do things like the smooth zoom you see at around 45 seconds. It would be remarkable in its execution otherwise, a good deal of attention to the details, but using such a famous picture as the basis for your shots also makes it kind of obvious that something is afoot.

I suspect there is some CG involved using the famous picture in OP over someone with a similar head shape.

>>8419966
I was trolling because I know how badly Nietzschefags get about his syphilis and how desperate they always are to exonerate their hero.

>>8419957
His sister didn't try to ruin his reputation, she tried to reconcile his beliefs with hers, and her beliefs were increasingly becoming common in Germany.

In fact it's likely that Nietzsche would not have been promulgated nearly as much as he was had his sister not published Will to Power and done so much to improve his image to the public. She dressed him in flowing white robes and built a legend of him as some kind of silent sage.

Of course this all goes completely counter to what Nietzsche would have wanted, but that's life for you, his sister willed to power all over his shit.

>>8419984
He legitimately did not have syphilis. It was very rare for someone with syphilis to live half as long as he did after a collapse in those days. He was not known to be engaged in promiscuous sex aside from one year in his twenties. That too is suspect because it is again very uncommon for symptoms of syphilis to arise so late after infection, not unheard of, but the fact that it was more than twenty years between his last contact with prostitutes and his collapse makes syphilis even less likely.

His mental symptoms weren't even like those of syphilitics, but rather much more like those of a lobotomy patient. He was at least partially cogent until he had his strokes but became infantile in his thought processes, which is what happens when your frontal cortex (which is responsible for things like moral judgement and abstract thinking) is detached from the rest of your brain. This might have been noticed had Nietzsche lived 50 years later, as the lobotomy wasn't developed until the 50s and obviously people in Nietzsche's day had a very poor understanding of the biology of the brain.

One of his pupils was enlarged from youth and he always had his horrible headaches on the same side of his head. He probably had a tumor on his optic nerve which was slowly growing up into his brain and gradually lobotomizing him. Far from me 'exonerating' him, this actually brings some interesting questions of how early this had begun to effect his thought processes. After all, the part of his brain being damaged was the one which is responsible for control of one's sense of morals which was something he wrote so much about.

What a tragedy

>>8419928
No,jus sum same attempt at whitewashing goin on .

>>8420024
Goddamn, that's terrifying.

>>8420024
His father also died from a "brain ailment," which would lend credence to this line of thought.

>>8419990
If you'd read anything from the period, you'd know Nietzsche was read and respected in Europe before any of that. He might not have become so notorious to the non-reading public, but that is entirely irrelevant.

File: 80088762.png (713KB, 1024x1023px) Image search: [Google]

713KB, 1024x1023px

>>8420024

>neuroscience can make sense of moral reasoning
>you really believe this

classic jonathon